Milo G. and Sarah E. Chapman, et al. - Page 20

                                                - 20 -                                                   
            from their loan agreements on the ground that the loans reflected                            
            therein were not as documented.  Petitioners have not acted in                               
            accordance with what they argue is the substance of the loans.                               
            Rather, petitioners freely admit the purpose of the corporate and                            
            plan loans was to permit Dura-Craft and Springbrook to escape the                            
            imposition of the excise tax pursuant to section 4975.                                       
            Petitioners now seek relief from the unforeseen tax consequences                             
            arising from the misrepresentation they deliberately perpetrated.                            
                  Petitioners may not disavow their chosen form of the loans                             
            on the belated assertion that the entire loan transaction was                                
            fictitious and was designed to avoid the prohibited transaction                              
            provisions of section 4975.  "One should not be garroted by the                              
            tax collector for calling one's agreement by the wrong name",                                
            Pacific Rock & Gravel Co. v. United States, 297 F.2d 122, 125                                
            (9th Cir. 1961), but to allow petitioners "to disavow their prior                            
            representations, under such circumstances would invite similar                               
            intentional deceit on the part of other taxpayers seeking to gain                            
            a tax benefit", Cluck v. Commissioner, 105 T.C. 324, 332 (1995);                             
            Lefever v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 525, 544 (1994), affd. 100 F.3d                            
            778 (10th Cir. 1996).  Having determined that petitioners may not                            
            disavow the form of their loans, we turn to consider the tax                                 
            consequences flowing from that form.                                                         

Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011